Why did Hackenberg become a punching bag for the media?

[#27TheDominator]

2 hours ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

If we had an elite defense like Denver and were stuck starting Trevor Semien over Lynch then the likes of dbatesman and tomshane would be losing their sh!t over that. Guys that whine, will always find reasons to whine. It's just in their DNA. 

When a team with Denver's QB situation looks at yours and says "at least we are better than them" you know you are in bad shape. 

[nicg4360]

It's a conspricy theory. The media are gonna mail it in everyone's head that hack sucks no matter what. What media guy would not want the jets to draft a potential Savior of the franchise wether he sucks or not a lot more interesting to bash as that's what NY media does. This is just sarcasm.

Sent from my Moto Z using JetNation.com mobile app

[Sperm Edwards]

Just now, 56mehl56 said:

Just curious how many times are these sites/blogs right and who holds them accountable if they are not. Its easy to knock a player knowing there are no repercussions.

Are people going to stop reading them because they get 50% wrong .

Except they don't get this wrong 50% of the time. By that, I don't mean they don't nail the careers of 50% of prospects, since most of the players in any draft class will bust.

When a QBASE suggests there's an 80% chance of being a bust, it's based on the results from past history -- namely, what percentage of players with these particular numbers turn into busts. An 80% chance isn't 100%, but going back that's how they arrive at that number; it isn't a subjective judgment call.

[56mehl56]

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Except they don't get this wrong 50% of the time. By that, I don't mean they don't nail the careers of 50% of prospects, since most of the players in any draft class will bust.

When a QBASE suggests there's an 80% chance of being a bust, it's based on the results from past history -- namely, what percentage of players with these particular numbers turn into busts. An 80% chance isn't 100%, but going back that's how they arrive at that number; it isn't a subjective judgment call.

Right ,which makes it as effective as a weather forecast. if there are no "penalties" for being wrong based on their analysis methods , then its about as useful as saying there's a 80% chance of it being sunny tomorrow because of historical data.

[nicg4360]

So say half the people on sites like this get their dying wish and Hackenberg busts like no one's business. Is that a good thing? Long term yes we get that FQB. But if he does not bust that would mean we have our signal caller. I mean what true jet fan would not want him to succeed. I just look at the alternative to drafting a FQB and it's pretty sweet with a high pick we will be getting. We could trade out and get a huge amount of good picks or draft that coveted edge rusher or the LT that will be here for the next decade. I get it people really like to hate on Hackenberg...he's a very easy target. I am a hack supporter but realize it's a long shot for him to make it. When I look at the possibilities if he can turn the next corner the future looks even better.

Sent from my Moto Z using JetNation.com mobile app

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

 

PFF gave Hack an "undraftable" grade in 2016. They also gave Dak Prescott an "undraftable" grade. They gave Goff a 1st round grade and Treyvon Boykin a 4-7 round grade. 

https://www.profootballfocus.com/draft-round-by-round-ranking-of-2016s-best-nfl-qb-prospects/

 

So you don't put all your eggs into one basket. You have a couple of online ratings systems (PFF and FO, among others) that both said just Hackenberg was that low in terms of likelihood of success. FO gave Prescott about a 50/50 chance of being at least a quality starter. 

We'll see with Goff; maybe he'll never be any better than he was last year. Maybe he is a good prospect still and just didn't put in the work, feeling he's got this and naively thinking he'll be able to coast as the #1 pick. He sucked but wasn't noticeably worse than Eli was as a rookie. 

[Sperm Edwards]

2 minutes ago, 56mehl56 said:

Right ,which makes it as effective as a weather forecast. if there are no "penalties" for being wrong based on their analysis methods , then its about as useful as saying there's a 80% chance of it being sunny tomorrow because of historical data.

It really isn't. They forecast tomorrow being sunny based on satellite pictures and other tools at their disposal, not based upon historical data. If anyone was as accurate of a drafter as weather forecasters are 1 day in advance, he'd be the most sought-after guru in the history of sports.

I don't see what penalties have to do with anything. If history suggests that a QB that did and showed certain things is likely to have a successful career or an unsuccessful career (based on others who'd done those things before him), then over time it's likely accurate. Given his completion percentage comparisons, it seems the 20% chance of success was higher than he was due. In other words, by the numbers they were being generous. 

Buying a powerball ticket carries as close as you can get to a 100% chance of failure. Yet there are winners. That doesn't mean the winner's chances were any better because a lottery winner was initially predicted to be a lottery loser.

We'll see. Hopefully he proves everyone wrong and he ends up in the 20% (chance of success) rather than the 80% (chance of failure). If he does, then the man that selected him will get appropriate kudos. I don't see why that is acceptable, but pointing out the opposite isn't.

[JohnnyLV]

3 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

When PFF gave him an "undraftable" grade it made a lot of radars. FO's QBASE said he had just over an 80% chance of being a bust. This was well before the Jets selected him.

Since these poor outlook stories were out there, were well circulated and discussed, and a GM still decided to use a relatively high pick on him, it's not totally unexpected. It suggests an arrogance that the drafter knows more than everybody. If he's going to get the credit for being right, in the face of all the poor draft grades, he deserves just as much of the opposite for swinging and missing with such a high pick. 

While it's doubtful he'd get this same attention level if he was drafted by the Titans, as was alluded earlier in the thread, had we taken him in round 5 Hackenberg wouldn't get nearly this much attention either. I agree with you, though, that they're not focusing on skewering the right person.

Fine, but there were also some really in depth analyses of Hack using lots of tape that were exceedingly strong on him as a prospect once you viewed him in context. Remember PFF also had out 2nd round receiver Stephen Hill as a Top 4 or 5 WR prospect of ALL TIME. So there's that.

[NoBowles]

44 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

It really isn't. They forecast tomorrow being sunny based on satellite pictures and other tools at their disposal, not based upon historical data. If anyone was as accurate of a drafter as weather forecasters are 1 day in advance, he'd be the most sought-after guru in the history of sports.

I don't see what penalties have to do with anything. If history suggests that a QB that did and showed certain things is likely to have a successful career or an unsuccessful career (based on others who'd done those things before him), then over time it's likely accurate. Given his completion percentage comparisons, it seems the 20% chance of success was higher than he was due. In other words, by the numbers they were being generous. 

Buying a powerball ticket carries as close as you can get to a 100% chance of failure. Yet there are winners. That doesn't mean the winner's chances were any better because a lottery winner was initially predicted to be a lottery loser.

We'll see. Hopefully he proves everyone wrong and he ends up in the 20% (chance of success) rather than the 80% (chance of failure). If he does, then the man that selected him will get appropriate kudos. I don't see why that is acceptable, but pointing out the opposite isn't.

Absolutely agree, if Hack turns out to be a complete bust, then he should be knocked for it, just as he should get credit if Hack happens to be good. I do think both sides would need to be taken in context however. A late 2nd round QB busting IMO in a vacuum is not enough to warrant getting killed over, while if a late 2nd round QB turns out to be a franchise QB, that would be a great pick and he should get a lot of credit. On the flip side, if the guys Maccagnan passed on this year go onto be franchise QB's, added into the context of the Hackenberg pick, he deservedly should get absolutely killed. 

Much like Idzik, I thought the Geno pick at the time was stupid, but its hard to kill a GM for picking a QB in the 2nd round. Where I thought he deserved to be killed and fired, was when he passed on the next batch of QB's because he had Geno.

[MaxAF]

1. It's New York. Not many can handle the media here.

2. He was drafted relatively high in the draft.

3. The Jets have kept him under double super top secret anonymity. 

4. Nobody really knows his progression or potential.

My opinion is he will get his shot and have struggles and successes. Whether the NY media and the fans can handle that.....doubtful. He'll probably get boo'd out of the stadium at the first sign of failure. I wish him all the best. No QB coming into this league will light it up with the Jets current supporting cast.

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, NoBowles said:

Absolutely agree, if Hack turns out to be a complete bust, then he should be knocked for it, just as he should get credit if Hack happens to be good. I do think both sides would need to be taken in context however. A late 2nd round QB busting IMO in a vacuum is not enough to warrant getting killed over, while if a late 2nd round QB turns out to be a franchise QB, that would be a great pick and he should get a lot of credit. On the flip side, if the guys Maccagnan passed on this year go onto be franchise QB's, added into the context of the Hackenberg pick, he deservedly should get absolutely killed. 

Much like Idzik, I thought the Geno pick at the time was stupid, but its hard to kill a GM for picking a QB in the 2nd round. Where I thought he deserved to be killed and fired, was when he passed on the next batch of QB's because he had Geno.

It makes a difference when one considers their projections. For instance, no one would have been shocked if Geno was a top 10 pick.

A 2nd round bust is never good, but Hackenberg busting would be far worse because so many had him projected/ranked so much lower. 

[NoBowles]

36 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

It makes a difference when one considers their projections. For instance, no one would have been shocked if Geno was a top 10 pick.

A 2nd round bust is never good, but Hackenberg busting would be far worse because so many had him projected/ranked so much lower. 

There is no way of knowing where Geno would have fallen to had the Jets not taken him. I did not think there was any way in hell a Geno was going in the first round, let alone top 10

[T0mShane]

8 hours ago, #27TheDominator said:

 

Lynch was sucking it up in Denver last year, but was still better than Petty and Fitzpatrick last year.  You remember them, the guys that kept Hackenberg on the bench.  Even when they were injured. 

???????

[T0mShane]

7 hours ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

If we had an elite defense like Denver and were stuck starting Trevor Semien over Lynch then the likes of dbatesman and tomshane would be losing their sh!t over that. Guys that whine, will always find reasons to whine. It's just in their DNA. 

In fact, me and @dbatesman dream of having a quarterback as good as Trevor Siemian.

[The Crusher]

8 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

In fact, me and @dbatesman dream of having a quarterback as good as Trevor Siemian.

I dream of having a quarterback as good as bacon. It's delicious. 

[T0mShane]

1 minute ago, The Crusher said:

I dream of having a quarterback as good as bacon. It's delicious. 

There are no quarterbacks as good as bacon.

[The Crusher]

3 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

There are no quarterbacks as good as bacon.

Can't a fat man dream? Tom?

[thadude]

3 hours ago, NoBowles said:

There is no way of knowing where Geno would have fallen to had the Jets not taken him. I did not think there was any way in hell a Geno was going in the first round, let alone top 10

Geno was considered a first round pick until he bombed his interviews in 2013.  That's a fact.

 

And please, Geno is Joe f_cking Namath compared to Hackenberg

[thadude]

5 hours ago, MaxAF said:

1. It's New York. Not many can handle the media here.

2. He was drafted relatively high in the draft.

3. The Jets have kept him under double super top secret anonymity. 

4. Nobody really knows his progression or potential.

Everyone watching the OTA's says Hack is either bad or terrible.  He was horrible in TC and preseason last season

[NoBowles]

9 minutes ago, thadude said:

Geno was considered a first round pick until he bombed his interviews in 2013.  That's a fact.

 

And please, Geno is Joe f_cking Namath compared to Hackenberg

Who are you again? Do I know you?

[thadude]

Just now, NoBowles said:

Who are you again? Do I know you?

[NoBowles]

6 minutes ago, thadude said:

Positive repping yourself?

[thadude]

11 minutes ago, NoBowles said:

Positive repping yourself?

[#27TheDominator]

13 hours ago, T0mShane said:

There are no quarterbacks as good as bacon.

^longs to taste Brady

[T0mShane]

4 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

^longs to taste Brady

Going to assume it tastes like kale, HGH, and smarm.

[Scott Dierking]

On 6/11/2017 at 2:48 PM, dbatesman said:

It's worth remembering that almost all of the crappy guys the Jets have drafted just in the last decade or so, from Clemens to Gholston to Sanchez to Coples to Geno, were all really good (in some cases great) college players. That doesn't make them great or even good pro prospects, but at least it's something. Hackenberg's college career was for sh*t.

So, are you saying the approach should not be to draft great college players? You should be on board then.

 

[Scott Dierking]

11 hours ago, thadude said:

Everyone watching the OTA's says Hack is either bad or terrible.  He was horrible in TC and preseason last season

List "everyone"

[dbatesman]

1 minute ago, Scott Dierking said:

So, are you saying the approach should not be to draft great college players? You should be on board then.

 

ScottWhoFans over here

[Ex-Rex]

On 6/10/2017 at 9:08 PM, JetFanatic said:

Wow I could not have said that better myself.  I never disliked Kimberly Jones but now I'm a fan of hers for calling out all these loser reporters who jump and exaggerate on anything they can.  The poor kid has done nothing wrong and consistently gets sh*tted on.  The kid is 22 years old give him a break.  He didn't ask to get picked in the 2nd round.  Saddest part of all of this is if he was picked in the 5th round no one would be saying a thing about him.  Let him learn.

Jets beat writers - especially Rich Cimini and Steve Serby - have ALWAYS enjoyed dumping on the Jets any way they can and should not even have a job covering them if they can't be objective. It has become something of a "cottage industry" of talking heads coming up with Jet jokes. It is neither fair nor accurate but yet it continues from shots showing Pete Rozelle laughing as he calls out Ken O'Brien's name and other shots of the "butt fumble" etc.  Bottom line is I don't pay any attention to what these jerks have to say.

[#27TheDominator]

1 hour ago, Ex-Rex said:

Jets beat writers - especially Rich Cimini and Steve Serby - have ALWAYS enjoyed dumping on the Jets any way they can and should not even have a job covering them if they can't be objective. It has become something of a "cottage industry" of talking heads coming up with Jet jokes. It is neither fair nor accurate but yet it continues from shots showing Pete Rozelle laughing as he calls out Ken O'Brien's name and other shots of the "butt fumble" etc.  Bottom line is I don't pay any attention to what these jerks have to say.

Do you pay attention to the score?

[thadude]

4 hours ago, Scott Dierking said:

List "everyone"

Ok, Costello, Mehta, Kim Jones, the reporters who tipped his pass to the Out route, anyone with eyes

[Scott Dierking]

17 minutes ago, thadude said:

Ok, Costello, Mehta, Kim Jones, the reporters who tipped his pass to the Out route, anyone with eyes

Kim Jones actually said the opposite, so you are wrong there.

Your exaggeration and general trolliness knows no bounds

[C Mart]

Jets' Christian Hackenberg brushing off criticism: 'I don't pay attention to it'

FLORHAM PARK -- He surely heard it. Avoiding the clatter was impossible. The unfortunate bounces of a few Christian Hackenberg passes created instant internet hysteria.

Memes, videos and jokes swept the world wide web. But the man at the center of the drama wasn't listening. What was the point?

"I don't pay attention to it," Hackenberg said at his locker after the Jets concluded minicamp Thursday. "I'm a low-key guy... Whatever it is, I can't control it."

Few players on the Jets roster are a lightning rod like Hackenberg. Analysis of a couple may raise an eyebrow, but starting a sentence with "Hack..." turns all heads. He was a second-round pick last year, yet didn't play a down as a rookie. Now he's in the Jets wide-open competition, and everyone wants to know how the Penn State alum looks.

The answer? Like a young quarterback learning a brand new offense trying to get himself acclimated to the NFL game.

In the Jets three minicamp practices, Hackenberg completed 26 of 42 passes with three touchdowns and two interceptions. He showed signs of utter brilliance, and other moments of struggles. His read progression is still a work in progress, and his accuracy inconsistent.

Here's all the Jets care about: Hackenberg looked better in OTAs than he did as a rookie, and better in minicamp than he did in OTAs.

"You guys want to know what we're looking for? Right now, we're looking for the moment," quarterbacks coach Jeremy Bates said Wednesday. "What's he doing today? And he's growing in the meeting room, the classroom, and on the field he's getting better. He's growing every day ... We look forward to seeing him come out to two-a-days and get better every day. I think he's throwing the ball well."

That's not what some want to hear. They seemingly want the 22-year-old to fail. The fact a few practice passes nicked the limbs of reporters is more important than improved footwork or decision-making.

It would be ignorant not to point out Hackenberg's flaws or areas he can improve. But to only focus on them? Ignore any legitimate positives? That doesn't seem fair.

Even so, Hackenberg's not losing any sleep. He's dealt with scrutiny before. He was one of the few players to stick around Penn State when the NCAA hit the school with sanctions stemming from the Jerry Sandusky scandal.

Hackenberg's doing now what he did then: Tuning out the noise

Unless it comes from those whose opinions matter.

"I think ultimately, in my opinion, the only people whose opinions I really care about are the people I'm involved with every day," Hackenberg said, "and know exactly what's going on in this building as an offense and as a team. My quarterback coach specifically.

"If those guys say something to me, I'm going to take that to heart because they know exactly what's going on, every detail of it. That's how I look at it."

Jets' Christian Hackenberg brushing off criticism: 'I don't pay attention to it'
 

[Gastineau Lives]

I cannot wait until Hackenberg becomes a Glennon-level talent and we pass on Sam Darnold to draft a cornerback.

[thadude]

On 6/13/2017 at 1:38 PM, Scott Dierking said:

Kim Jones actually said the opposite, so you are wrong there.

Nope you're wrong again.  She minimized Hack's garbage by saying his "bounced" onto the reporter.  Nice lady